I am talking about state governments, dude. The executive branches in the state governments enacted policies that undermined the legislature of the same state governments. For example, if the legislative body said signatures need to be verified, but the Secretary of State told the election officials that wasn't necessary, that should be  unconstitutional. It's the legislative branch's role to determine the rules of the election unless it expressly has given that jurisdiction over to the executive. 

If I recall (don't have time to verify now, heading to lunch), this happened in GA. Throwing out votes that didn't match signatures is unprovable at this point, though, but that likely gave a massive advantage to democrats based on previous years. If there were votes being counted that violated the rules as written by the GA legislature, it alters the results. You had ballot curing in primarily blue areas in PA, but not in red areas, which, again if I recall correctly, was against the rules according to the PA legislature. We know in swing states this year, in an election with the most potential for domestic vulnerabilities, there were less ballots thrown out than years past. These subtle changes gave advantages to very specific cities in GA, PA, MI, and WI. I think it accounts for the disparity that is unique to those cities as opposed to the rest of the country. 

I don't know about all the machine stuff. I'm waiting to see what evidence is presented. I don't think Powell is a hack, but people have surprised me in the past. I don't think Trump's team can prove fraud is widespread. They are going to have to find a different way, and I think the best of their unlikely options are what I am posting above.

---